General Virus Related car B.S.

[Epoustouflant]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

I hope not. Vaccine seems a ways off, at least longer than we can huddle at home which to me means it will spike again later after we see peak here in a couple more weeks.

Read this;

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coron...e-be9337092b56

[FrozenE92M3]

Originally Posted by Epoustouflant

That was a whole lot of nothing.

Here, educate yourself:
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coron...e-be9337092b56

The medium is a biased leftist shithole, and cannot be trusted as a proper source.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

Bob,

Covid-19 is more deadly and more contagious than the flu. You are right that 80% of the population will be fine if they catch it. It is unfortunate you don't care about the other 20%. They are our friends, parents, relatives, neighbors and many we don't know who are old or have other illnesses or compromised immune systems. They can catch Covid-19 from the other 80%. If many get it at once or in a short period of time, the likelihood of the vulnerable 20% getting it goes way up. You apparently don't understand that there aren't enough hospitals and ventilators to treat the very sick among that vulnerable 20%, so many would die. If you were able to read, you would know exactly that is happening in Italy right now. The goal is to flatten out the curve so people are exposed at a lower rate over a longer period of time si the health care system can manage it rather than be overwhelmed with the result being that many more die than is necessary. I don't know whether you are ignorant, stupid, or just greedy and upset the stock market is down, but based on your comment about how you have been a trader and investor for 25 years, greed seems like one match and I'd say ignorance is a pretty likely second match.

From the greed angle my understanding is traders can make money on the way up and on the way down.

The people who will financially be hurt by recession/depression will be those retiring soon and those who lose their job. People who keep their jobs and who won't retire soon will be okay, and savvy traders will be just fine.

I suppose if we slide into anarchy then it's going be very bad for everyone.

It's not clear to me the value of sacrifice in economy, freedom, and sanity vs X lives. At some point the misery from being locked inside and creating a depression or worse, isn't worth it, but I don't know where that line is. I do think people in Western cultures won't put up with it at some point. Eventually after some number of months people would rather take their chances and live life than stay in eating canned beans. Not sure how many months before people would defy an indefinite lockdown, but at some point they would.

At any rate, Goldman Sachs predicts unemployment to hit 9 precent and the economy to not recover really until some time in 2021, so buckle up. Wash your fucking hands, don't cough into them, and if you have extra cash buy some stocks when the price is depressed. Hopefully with limited shelter in place we get through this without too much chaos or loss of life.

[RedScytheM3]

Originally Posted by FrozenE92M3

The medium is a biased leftist shithole, and cannot be trusted as a proper source.

Viruses don't care if you're left or right. What are you really trying to say here? If you are truly bothered by political bias and care about the science of what's impacting our lives today I urge you to pick up a Field's virology book instead.

[RedScytheM3]

Originally Posted by akkando

From the greed angle my understanding is traders can make money on the way up and on the way down.

The people who will financially be hurt by recession/depression will be those retiring soon and those who lose their job. People who keep their jobs and who won't retire soon will be okay, and savvy traders will be just fine.

I suppose if we slide into anarchy then it's going be very bad for everyone.

It's not clear to me the value of sacrifice in economy, freedom, and sanity vs X lives. At some point the misery from being locked inside and creating a depression or worse, isn't worth it, but I don't know where that line is. I do think people in Western cultures won't put up with it at some point. Eventually after some number of months people would rather take their chances and live life than stay in eating canned beans. Not sure how many months before people would defy an indefinite lockdown, but at some point they would.

At any rate, Goldman Sachs predicts unemployment to hit 9 precent and the economy to not recover really until some time in 2021, so buckle up. Wash your fucking hands, don't cough into them, and if you have extra cash buy some stocks when the price is depressed. Hopefully with limited shelter in place we get through this without too much chaos or loss of life.

There is great value in performing actions that mitigate potential damages caused by what some call 'acts of god' (natural disasters, pandemics, etc.)

A virus pandemic is no different than say a flood or hurricane. No one asked for it, but you have to deal with it when it lands. The effects of floods and hurricanes are glaringly obvious. Why? Because we know what it looks like, it's fresh in our memory, and your relative risk in an affected area is great. A pandemic? We don't get those too often, and people underestimate their relative risk when it comes to infections especially those that look like run of the mill colds. Of course we'd rather be living our lives than dealing with nature when it strikes (ie clearing rubble, rescuing folks from flooded neighborhoods, sheltering in place to prevent spreading infectious disease). Dealing with nature is intrinsically costly and if you do nothing then that cost goes up in magnitude. In the case of say an earthquake, a local economy will collapse if you don't clear rubble and rebuild. In the case of a pandemic, the economy will collapse on a broader scale if hospitals become overloaded and start failing to handle case loads.

Do we pay X now to deal with it, or some greater amount Z later if we just say f*** it?

[Epoustouflant]

Originally Posted by FrozenE92M3

The medium is a biased leftist shithole, and cannot be trusted as a proper source.

Are you serious? The Medium is not an editor, they are merely a blogging platform for anyone to speak their mind; left or right.

Read the damn article - it aggregates the most up to date data we have available and goes into deep details on various models, and the collateral impact of failing to suppress the virus.

[smyles]

Originally Posted by RedScytheM3

I'll try to help you with this as best I can. I work in one of the hospitals in Texas Medical Center and I can tell you to forget that 1% number you're holding onto for some reason. The threat of this virus is not just in the number of people that it can potentially kill, but what can happen in the event that it runs rampant through communities.

Hypothetically, without taking any protective measures you will run into impacting our very poorly funded medical infrastructure in a matter of weeks. Public hospitals (private either) do not have enough beds to care for every person that may get sick, fatally or otherwise. Hospitals would fill up, run out of supplies, and beds. ...

I keep hearing/reading about this, and can't help but wonder: almost every year we have some kind of flu pandemic. With hundred of thousands, if not millions, infected/affected, how come it's not a problem then, but this time it's the end of the world? Are you sayings we're rolling the dice every year, just silently? To my knowledge, flu shots are something like 20% effective, so it's not like they mitigate the issue greatly (I can be wrong with the numbers, but you get my point, hopefully).

[1MOREMOD]

Flu shots are more like 40-70 percent effective any given year depending on how well they guess what strain will be most prevalent.

[smyles]

ok, so 30...60% still get sick. For US what, few millions? For how many it's serious enough that warrants an ER/hospital visit? A multi day stay? The latter, I imagine, is mostly seniors & folks with conditions, so treatment involves much more than just a Tylenol and meal 3 times a day. How that volume is tolerable, but expected from covid is not?

I'm not arguing or downplaying the severeness of covid impact, but at the same time curious re doomsday claims.

[RedScytheM3]

Originally Posted by smyles

I keep hearing/reading about this, and can't help but wonder: almost every year we have some kind of flu pandemic. With hundred of thousands, if not millions, infected/affected, how come it's not a problem then, but this time it's the end of the world? Are you sayings we're rolling the dice every year, just silently? To my knowledge, flu shots are something like 20% effective, so it's not like they mitigate the issue greatly (I can be wrong with the numbers, but you get my point, hopefully).

The thing about flu is we mass produce a vaccine every year tailored to the type of flu that's upcoming. Flu season in the Southern Hemisphere is during the summer months (their winter), and that is where we monitor the upcoming flu strain ahead of time. We have time to prepare massive amounts of vaccines and vaccinate as many people as we can. That provides herd immunity and restricts the spread of flu in communities. Flu shots are very effective - they are protective and if you still happen to get sick the severity is much reduced. In every hospital I've encountered they have policies requiring employees to get the flu shot. So, there's no worry about it spreading through health workers, or from health workers to patients. For the novel Coronavirus, the key is we've never seen it before. We've had no advanced time to make a vaccine. It's here spreading while we try to stop it, make drugs and vaccines at the same time. Much different scenario.

[RedScytheM3]

Originally Posted by smyles

ok, so 30...60% still get sick. For US what, few millions? For how many it's serious enough that warrants an ER/hospital visit? A multi day stay? The latter, I imagine, is mostly seniors & folks with conditions, so treatment involves much more than just a Tylenol and meal 3 times a day. How that volume is tolerable, but expected from covid is not?

I'm not arguing or downplaying the severeness of covid impact, but at the same time curious re doomsday claims.

See my above post.

Everyone, Please try to inform yourselves and stay on top of information. Everything I'm explaining and the answers to all of your questions are readily available from reliable sources. There are major differences between Coronavirus and flu and how we tackle something we know is coming vs something unexpected.

[IB M]

Originally Posted by smyles

ok, so 30...60% still get sick. For US what, few millions? For how many it's serious enough that warrants an ER/hospital visit? A multi day stay? The latter, I imagine, is mostly seniors & folks with conditions, so treatment involves much more than just a Tylenol and meal 3 times a day. How that volume is tolerable, but expected from covid is not?

I'm not arguing or downplaying the severeness of covid impact, but at the same time curious re doomsday claims.

It's a simple math problem - COVID is 10 to 30 times more deadly than the Flu. The Flu kills 30,000 USA citizens every year so rough estimate COVIID unchecked could kill 300,000 to 1 million people and destroy the hospital infrastructure.

Let's hope the 15 day pause brings it under control and we can return to a more normal life and economy.

[smyles]

Ok, let's use math.
Scenario A, regular flu: 100 admitted, 5 dead, 95 discharged.
Scenario B, covid: 100 admitted, 50 dead, 50 discharged.

What's the total man-hours, equipment-hours spent per patient in each scenario. Is it 10-30 times more for B?

One may argue that covid may cause more hospitalized patients in absolute terms, but how wide spread should be to exceed our annual flu numbers?

[Helmsman]

Originally Posted by IB M

It's a simple math problem - COVID is 10 to 30 times more deadly than the Flu. The Flu kills 30,000 USA citizens every year so rough estimate COVIID unchecked could kill 300,000 to 1 million people and destroy the hospital infrastructure.

Let's hope the 15 day pause brings it under control and we can return to a more normal life and economy.

Curious, 10-30 times deadlier at what point, once at intensive care?

[IB M]

Originally Posted by Helmsman

Curious, 10-30 times deadlier at what point, once at intensive care?

Overall start to finish - Flu kills about 0.1% of those infected and COVID appears to kill about 1% to 3% of those infected. There is debate on the covid numbers as many mild cases likely go undetected. Italy is seeing a 7% to 9% death rate Germany only 0.4% so there is a wide range.

[1MOREMOD]

Both flu and corona are gonna have tons of cases that dont get diagnosed and treated. Making death rate lower.

[PACarGuy]

For those having a hard time understanding why COVID is different from your everyday flu (at least here in the US), here's what the impact looks like for your state if measures aren't taken. It has to do with hospital capacity and overwhelming the system due to a virus with no current vaccine and no herd immunity yet:

https://covidactnow.org/

As you can see, doing nothing we quickly overwhelm the available hospital beds, ensuring others who don't have COVID die as well since they will not be able to get needed hospitalization if their health fails during that time.
And as one who has a doc for a wife and several docs in my family, hearing stories of how it takes 3 hours to clean a room or an OR used by a COVID+ patient, and how short even major hospitals are in terms of PPE, you realize how fragile our healthcare system is in this country. If lots of healthcare workers start getting infected and fall ill (like in Italy) the situation gets worse. I have seen guidelines put out for docs telling them to resort to using scarves and bandanas if they run out of PPE...

[1MOREMOD]

We got it, it's not the flu. How does the flu have millions affected and we have thousands now with corona and the flu doesnt overwhelm the hospital system?

[DRLane]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

We got it, it's not the flu. How does the flu have millions affected and we have thousands now with corona and the flu doesnt overwhelm the hospital system?

Have you had the flu and gone to the hospital? They admit you, administer fluids to rehydrate, if it's early enough prescribe Tamiflu, and send you home. Total duration is like 3 hours.

Not the case with COVID-19.

Here's a worthwhile walk through of hospital wing in Italy.

You'll have to open on browser to watch.

[smyles]

Originally Posted by DRLane

Have you had the flu and gone to the hospital? They admit you, administer fluids to rehydrate, if it's early enough prescribe Tamiflu, and send you home. Total duration is like 3 hours. ...

And those 10.000+ deaths from flu also happen within 3 hours?

[1MOREMOD]

I've never gone to the hospital for anything, and hoping this is the same because I will get it far before 12 months, with thousand exposures a day and my job not going anywhere

[PACarGuy]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

We got it, it's not the flu. How does the flu have millions affected and we have thousands now with corona and the flu doesnt overwhelm the hospital system?

Because we have vaccines for the flu, which creates herd immunity for many, and since healthcare workers are required to get a flu shot, it doesn't further the spread. The flu doesn't mutate as quickly as other viruses and usually doesn't have the same devastating respiratory complications as COVID-19. So you don't end up with as many people hospitalized or on ventilators.

Difference in hospitalization rate between flu and COVID is staggering. ~2% for flu, and about 20-30% for COVID.

Also, it takes around 5 days for someone with COVID to develop symptoms, whereas with the flu, it’s 2 days. That gives people more time to spread COVID asymptomatically before they know they are sick. So faster spread.

The info is all out there if you want to take the time to read it:

https://www.vox.com/science-and-heal...flu-comparison

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm